Memo to Michael Chertoff: Stand down.
In the meantime, any plans for an Iranian 'invasion' are of use only to armchair generals. No such plan will take place.
Memo to Pentagon: Stand down.
Posted on 09/11/2006 9:23:52 PM PDT by pissant
That is a direct quote from Gen Abaziad. To which he followed up, as did General Pace, that we are quite capable of snuffing the violence there, which we have been doing effectively since July.
And you are assuming that the Pentagon is not spending vast resources for a planned Iran Invasion. That would be incorrect.
I read your long post. You have some good points but you also have a couple of flaws. I agree Iran is a big fish. I'll comment on the entire post when I have time.
I look forward to it.
Amelia, Small correction: your link was actually the WashPost filtered spin on what the Marine col said. Go to reply #82 or 85 and someone from Al Anbar province was saying that he got the presentation and report and it was not accurate reflection of what the col is saying. See also reply #114.
Reply #93 said:
"Ricks makes stuff up, puts it in the mouths of "anonymous sources" and believes that no one will ever catch on. But he recently wrote a book using the same technique. Unfortunately there are a lot of people in the military who have directly challenged things he says in the book and he, and the book, have been relegated to the DBM memory hole. It's the only way they can avoid paying attention to his critics."
"Pissant: My point is that while we are stopping(on not stoppiing) the worst violence our guy in Iraq has ever seen to avoid civil war, the Iranians are building themselves the bomb. That means that while we are shovelling flies in Bagdad, the bad guys are fixin to blow up Pittsburg."
Correction: Iran has no intention of blowing up Pittsburg.
They have every intention of using their nuclear weapons to intimidate Israel into dhimmitude and provide cover for their terrorists operatives. Their target is Tel Aviv.
In the meantime, any plans for an Iranian 'invasion' are of use only to armchair generals. No such plan will take place. However, a democratic Iraq can and will shake the Iranian regime enough to force regime change from within there.
I could say I was in Al Anbar, too, and you wouldn't know the difference.
You've given no sources to back up your assertions, nor are there any sources in the posts you referred me to, which makes them merely the opinions of other posters.
I have my own sources, which I regard as extremely credible and which agree with the articles, but you don't have to believe my posts if you don't want to.
"We should either turn this into a real occupation, with real occupation numbers, or turn it into a counterinsurgency support effort, with a solid presence of special operations and support troops, and leave the day to day security to the Iraqis."
That's the plan, but the force reduction is gated by the capability of the Iraqi forces.
"You've given no sources to back up your assertions,"
Wrong, I pointed to several replies, one which in turn linked to Major Gen. Zilmer of MNF giving on the record the very pointed response to the article and explained that it was being misinterpreted by the media.
Since you didnt seem to follow the links, let me post it in entirety here:
FALLUJAH, Iraq – Recent media reports fail to accurately capture the entirety and complexity of the current situation in the Al Anbar Province of Iraq. The classified assessment, which has been referred to in these reports, was intended to focus on the causes of the insurgency. It was not intended to address the positive effects Coalition and Iraqi forces have achieved on the security environment over the past years.
That said, there is an active insurgency in Anbar. The enemy we face has no concern for the welfare of the Iraqi people, nor any peaceful vision for their future. We believe the Iraqi people want something more and are willing to fight and die for it.
We are making steady progress in the accomplishment of our primary mission to train and develop the Iraqi Security Forces to defeat the insurgency. This is due in large measure to the successful recruiting and training of thousands of Iraqi Police and improvements in the overall capabilities of the Iraqi Army. This has resulted in the transfer of increasing responsibilities to the ISF for fighting the insurgency. Finally, the progress we have made has been due to the dedicated and heroic actions of both US and Iraqi forces.
Despite these consistent advances in the security environment, we have found making the same progress politically and economically, throughout all of Anbar, to be much more challenging. In areas where the presence of Iraqi Security Forces is combined with an effective local civil government, we have seen progress made. Not just in the area of security, but in economic development and the establishment of social order and public services. These are the conditions which must be set that will result in the support of the local people, and ultimately cause the defeat of this terrorist backed insurgency.
For lasting progress to take place, comparably effective advances must be made in the development of governmental and economic institutions at the local, provincial and national levels. Only then, will the people of Al Anbar be able to realize their goal of long-term security, prosperity and confidence in their government.
Link here: http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5546&Itemid=21
Read the last 2 paragraphs you posted carefully. They say we are not making progress in most of Anbar province. It's just a different spin on the same information.
Memo to Michael Chertoff: Stand down.
In the meantime, any plans for an Iranian 'invasion' are of use only to armchair generals. No such plan will take place.
Memo to Pentagon: Stand down.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.